Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I would read your responses. I really would. They're long, but I can tolerate long responses so long as there is a sentence structure, punctuation, capitalization and at least semi-decent spelling.

You really shouldn't question the intelligence of others when you can't type out coherent responses, and you really shouldn't talk about education when you can't punctuate. And asking me if I understand the term correlation would be better if you spelled the word right.

I'm going to give you some facts. You can use inference, you can use whatever word you want. You can make up words to explain it for all I care. Whatever you decide to do with them, they are facts.

There is a pattern of lower gun crime with higher amounts of guns.
Australia, Switzerland, California in this case.

There's an old saying. Different ways of saying it, but same principle. Once is an occurrence. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is a pattern. There is more than a pattern to suggest that gun control doesn't help in preventing gun crimes or gun murders.

The same thing that's happening in California right now happened in Virginia. Gun sales soared, gun crimes decreased. Call it whatever you want, but it keeps happening.

Your argument is not being based on facts, it is being based on lawyer-istic bull that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

You can continue to use words to argue against facts, but the facts are there.

First of all lets look at long term trends shall we. The homicide rates in America has been dropping since we ever started recording it in the 1700's. There have been a few spikes along that time but the American people have been heavily armed throughout that time.

Its ridiculous to assume that their is coorletation between guns sales and less crime since a number of things impact guns sales one of which is simply guns being sold by one dealer to another. My farther works in guns sales in California and large increase in guns sales in Calfornia is due to fear of gun collectors in a liberal state. Basically you have more gun collectors and even dealers buying up the stock because they feel that its a safe investment and promises a profit. Ammunition followed the same trend in Caly as well.

If you want to show anything that is stistically relevant in the US then show new gun ownership rates in high crime rate areas. Show a decrease in violent crimes and I could half way take your post seriously.

If people had actually read the article that was linked to within the original story you would have seen that the statistics they used to come up with this specifically say that the increase in guns sales isn't responsible for the decline in deaths.

The latest declines mark the continuation of a nearly two-decade drop in crime levels — a trend that almost no one in the field of criminology predicted, said Professor John Caulkins of Carnegie Mellon Heinz College. The trend, said Caulkins, is a reflection of a range of many factors, including policing practices.

A drop in the number of people in the peak crime-age category of teens to 25-year-olds also contributed to the crime reductions, Caulkins said, but added that “if this were only a story of demographics, we would never have had this kind of substantial decline.”

So it looks like policing practices, as Yagyu said earlier, specifically with regards to dealing with the youth culture has made a significant impact.

Here's another one:

The victimization survey found that the increase in the number of violent crimes was due largely to an upward swing in simple assaults, which rose 22 percent, from 4 million in 2010 to 5 million last year. The incidence of rape, sexual assault and robbery remained largely unchanged, as did serious violent crime involving weapons or injury.

The experts said the percentage increases in last year's survey were so large primarily because the 2011 crime totals were compared with historically low levels of crime in 2010.

And just as a bonus:

The FBI said firearms were used in two-thirds of the nation's murders last year, and in two out of every five robberies and in one out of five aggravated assaults.

So guns would still be the primary reason behind the majority of murders and nearly half of the robberies committed. But hey, more guns sales led to less crimes and all the other factors were ignored, so more guns must mean more safety!

Correlation doesn't equal causation.

Vic Mackey: You better figure out how much you hate me. And how you're going to deal with that. 'Cause I'm not going anywhere.

This article was posted in the general form's discussion on gun control. It was basically discedited by plenty of valid arguments. I don't want to repeat and steal other people's arguments (small sample size & the use of policing policies) but this article is misleading in many ways.

I doubt you can find too many studies that can correlate less violence to more gun ownership. It is a fact that people are more confrontational when they have a gun and people have too many subconsciously biases to properly evaluate others (and situations) unbiasedly.

Originally Posted by Sam Hinkie

"I'm probably pretty boring to watch a game with because I''m all about expected values. I don''t even care if it goes in or not, I'm all about, '‘Should it go in?'' I can live with randomness. I mean, if it''s a close game in the end, yeah, I''m just like anyone else. But I just want us to play the odds all the time."

PJ media is a sham just like every other site longhorn uses.
they are funded by conservative ideologues and have no scientific support or control to their statistics or their claims...he even has sited BREIETBART (LOLOLOL)!!!

like i said, fed a line of nonsense and happy to accept it...hey, were in Texas Longhorn, if we were in Arkansas, Id habe to carry YOUR bags...get It?

This is the same guy that sites Mother Jones and Huffington Post, lol.

Keep ignoring facts, brah.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justinnum1
Wade will be a lot better next season now that he got knee surgery. Hate on. - 7/31/2012

never once cited Mother Jones.
Huff post ive copied article NOT STUDIES.
articles are opinion pieces, STUDIES attempt to show scientifically a corellation between things.
Your author has no credible experience...do you understand that?
He is a RT wing propagandist, just like Breitbart.
they are starting with a conclusion and building a case to support it.

scientists dont do that, your guys do, that is why they are full of sh..